I grew up in India and both my parents worked for a Central government company. Their company has quarters (apartment complexes) which were heavily subsidized.

I grew up in India and both my parents worked for a Central government company. Their company has quarters (apartment complexes) which were heavily subsidized. The employee could own one individual apartment or pay subsidized monthly rent. The company (central govt. in this case) offer loans for their employees at a lower than market rate to own this apartment. I like that approach. Since both my parents were working they were able to afford a house outside of the area but a lot of their coworkers owned an apartment. Those apartment complexes were categorized differently for different income people. So a lower income worker is not forced to live on an apartment that they can't afford. I wonder why Facebook or Google can't take a similar approach. I understand that in this particular case, the employee is a contractor who happens to work at Facebook. Heck, if I happened to work for such a company I know I would live there.